Google has told the EU it will not add fact checks to search results and YouTube videos or use them in ranking or removing content, despite the requirements of a new EU law, according to a copy of a letter obtained by Axios
You must log in or # to comment.
What “new EU law” is being discussed? I read several articles like this but I failed to figure that out.
It helps me that this article expressed “The EU’s Code of Practice on Disinformation, introduced in 2022, includes several voluntary commitments” is relevant, but I don’t consider a law that is 2-3 years old to be “new”. Moreover, I’m not even sure what a “voluntary commitment” is in the context of a law.
I would love to see Google banned from the EU.
Same.
I would love for the EU to replace them with a non shit ai polluted search engine. Please?
It already exists: Qwant
Also there is Ecosia from Germany and Startpage from the Netherlands. Although I love DDG most
Time to fine them 100 million a day until they comply
Uh… How are they realistically supposed to do that?
Community notes, probably.
I do have to wonder, how could Google (or any search engine) be expected to perform fact checking on search results? It seems technically impossible.
Google doesn’t just provide links, it scrubs content out of sites (with scripts before, now with LLMs) and presents it as Google’s own content.
If they do that, they should be responsible if the content break laws.
Oh, yes I agree they should be responsible for anything they generate themselves, but if it’s just a regurgitation of content that their web crawler pulled from a website which then appeared in search results then it’s the original website that should be responsible.
It seems like a heavy-handed enforcement of this policy could just break web search functionality entirely.
Downvoters have no idea how web indexes work.
So if Google pulls out the wrong part of your website and gives dangerous information, you’d be responsible?
Well, why is that ‘dangerous information’ available to be pulled out of my website in the first place?
My guy, leaving out context can change whether information is dangerous or not.
Say I have a website that explains how to get clothes clean, and I recommend bleach. I also have a subsection “Danger: things you should never do with bleach!” listing dangerous things, e.g. “drinking bleach”. Now Google pulls out only that list without the heading.
In your world, I’m responsible for Google showing information in the wrong context, which is nuts. I can’t be expected to write everything so it’s unambiguous, no matter how small a snippet you extract.
“You don’t want to drink bleach on a sunny day” could be understood as “It’s okay to drink bleach on a cloudy day”
Um… “could be”…? Literally anything anybody writes could be misinterpreted, so I don’t really see the point of this line of argument, nor any value in legislating around it.
